^{page xiii note 1} On place of publication, see Goldschmidt, E. M., Medieval Texts (Bibliographical Society, 1943), pp. 74–5Google Scholar. On publication of medieval historical texts in the early sixteenth century, cf. the introduction in Wattenbach, W., Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter (ed. Dummler, E.) (Stuttgart and Berlin, 1904), iGoogle Scholar. Th. Mommsen discusses Vergil's sources and methods in his preface to Chronica Minor.a saec. IV–VII (Mon. Germ. Hist.), iii. 19–20.

^{page xiii note 2} Below, p. xvii.

^{page xiii note 3} A description of the MS. will be found below, pp. xl–xli.

^{page xiii note 4} E.g. by Gasquet, Stornajolo, Whitney and Cram: for references, see below, p. xl.

^{page xiv note 1} ‘MS. of Vergil's, P.Anglica Historia’, Eng. Hist. Rev., liv (1939), pp. 241–3Google Scholar. References to the text below are to pages of the Latin version, if necessary to the relevant line (separated from the page by a point) ; if a collation is referred to, the page reference is followed by an asterisk ; if a textual note is cited, the page reference is followed by n. (cf. below, pp. xli–xlii).

^{page xiv note 2} E.g. below, pp. 24 n., 44 n., 126 n.

^{page xiv note 3} E.g. below, pp. 36.5, 36.13, 38.2, 52.3.

^{page xiv note 4} More must be said on this point. In 1939 a London bookseller offered for sale what was described as ‘the presentation copy to Henry VIII’ of the 1534 editio princeps. This attribution was presumably due to the following couplet, inscribed by a sixteenth-century italic hand on the title page : are subscribed with a monogram (? the letters R and L) enclosed in a clumsy flourish. These verses are among those with which the citizens of London adorned the streets of the capital on the occasion of Charles V's visit in 1522 and are printed by Hall in his Chronicle (ed. Ellis [1809], pp. 639–40) ; it is, of course, not possible to say whether they were copied into this copy of the Anglica Historia from Hall. In any case the verses are in no sense a dedication, and it is inconceivable that any dedication in or after 1534 should link Henry's name with Charles's. Moreover, the hand in the book is demonstrably not Vergil's. If. comparison is made with his most formal hand (e.g. letter to Aleandro 1520, Vatican cod. lat. 6199, fo. 23r) it will be seen that it differs from the hand in the so-called ‘presentation copy’ not only in general spirit, but in detail: the formation of capitals N and A, of small r, d and abbreviated que ; while Vergil (unlike the inscriber of the book) never writes initial u as v except as a capital. This lengthy demonstration has unfortunately been made necessary as a result of the purchase of the volume by the Historical Library of the Yale School of Medicine, and an article on it by Fulton, J. F., ‘P. Vergil, his chapters on the history of physick and his Anglica historia’, Bulletin of the History of Medicine, Supplement 3 (1944), pp. 65–88Google Scholar. In this article a number of remarkable assumptions are made— e.g. the volume is bound in ‘royal Tudor calf’, the flourishes are ‘a somewhat overembellished PV’, the monogram stands for RL ‘since Polydore's first official [sic] position was rector of Church Langston’—as a result of which the author is ‘led to believe that it is, in fact, the dedication copy to Henry VIII and that the inscriptions are in the hand of Polydore himself’. This conclusion certainly does ‘add an interesting sidelight on the relations existing in 1534 between Henry VIII, Charles V and the Holy Roman Empire’ I A far more likely explanation for the inscriptions must be sought than one which flouts the facts and involves rewriting the history of Europe in the sixteenth century.

^{page xv note 1} On Veterani see Hana Nachod, ‘Inscription on Federigo da Monte-Feltro's studio … by Veterani’, F., Medievalia et Humanistica, ii (1944), pp. 98–105Google Scholar, and references there collected, to which may be added Bembo, P., Epist. Fam. Lib. VI (Venice, 1552), p. 182Google Scholar ; and Vatican cod. Urb. Lat. 411, fo. Hr, ‘Excerpta ex annalibus Polydori a Veterano exarata’ which derives from the MS. of the Anglica Historia, i, fo. 77r, and describes the origin of the order of the Garter, to which successive dukes of Urbino were admitted.

^{page xv note 2} Above, p. xiv, n. 1.

^{page xv note 3} Contents of the MS. are given below, pp. xl–xli.

^{page xv note 4} Cf. below, p. 62.9 and collation ibid.: ‘ etiam nunc, qui est annus salutis MDXII’.

^{page xv note 5} Below, p. 94.10–11*.

^{page xvi note 1} A, p. 87 ; BC, p. 89.

^{page xvi note 2} Ed. Elzevir, Amsterdam 1671, p. 4.

^{page xvii note 1} Cf. More's apparent hesitation over his Richard III: Pollard, A. F., ‘Making of Sir T. More's Richard III’, Essays in Honour of J. Tait (1933), pp. 223–38Google Scholar.

^{page xviii note 1} It is to be regretted that the only discursive treatment of the Anglica Historia is to be found in Edwin Johnson, Rise of English Culture (1904).

^{page xviii note 2} Kingsford, C. L., English Historical Literature in the XVth Century (Oxford 1913). p. 254Google Scholar ; J. Gairdner, Early Chroniclers of Europe : England, pp. 304–5.

^{page xviii note 3} The main classical authors quoted are as follows (date of editio princeps in parentheses): Caesar (1469), Polybius (1530, Lat. trans. 1473), Livy (1469), Strabo (1516), Columella (1471), Pliny (1469), Tacitus (1470), Ptolemy (1533 ; Lat. trans. 1462), Spartianus (1475 ; ed. Erasmus 1518), Eusebius (in Rufinus' translation, 1474), Eutropius (1471). It is not claimed that Vergil worked in all cases from the texts of these authors, even when available; a good deal he must have derived from various secondary collections and commentaries. In addition to these authorities, the Anglica Historia contains a fair number of classical ‘quotations’, mainly from Vergil and Cicero. The Bible is also quoted to a surprising extent: cf. below, ‘quotations’ in the Index.

^{page xviii note 4} Kingsford, op. cit., pp. 254–5.

^{page xviii note 5} Hay in Eng. Hist. Rev., liv. 244 n.

^{page xix note 1} Ellis, Cam. Soc, xxxvi, pp. vi–vii, xii–xiii.

^{page xix note 2} Op. cit., pp. 190–1.

^{page xix note 3} Cf. below, p. 88.8; cf. 74.6.

^{page xix note 4} Op. cit., pp. 191–2. More wrote between 1513 and 1515 (A. F. Pollard, op. cit., p. 224).

^{page xix note 5} The herald's MS. (Brit. Mus., MS. Cotton, Julius B. xii) printed by T. Hearne in his edition of Leland's Collectanea (1770), iv. 185–257, covers the years 1485–9 ; the list of baronets and knights created after Stoke (ibid., pp. 214–15) should be compared with Vergil's muster of gentlemen (below, p. 22*). Vergil's other nominal rolls will be found below, PP 5*. 52*. 94–95*i 99–100*, 106*. Busch (see below, p. xx, n. 2), p. 397, also draws attention to other uses of documentary material by Vergil—statutes, papal bulls, the Anglo-Scottish treaty.

^{page xx note 1} Vergil's accounts of the beginning of the work are to be found in the MS. Dedication and in the 1518 dedication to J.-M. Vergil of the De Inuentoribus Rerum. In the former he writes : ‘When I first arrived in England, lest I should abuse my leisure, of my own will I gave myself the task of writing the history of the peoples who have inhabited this famous visland from early times to the present day.’ In the latter he says : ‘where [sc. in England] lest I should waste my time, and at the request of Henry VII … I wrote the deeds of his people and produced a historical work; which work—by heavens—has been twelve years in the making, and is not yet completed’. This produces 1506 as the date of inception, which is confirmed in the MS. dedication by his claim that he spent six years in research before he began writing, which (as we have argued) was in 1512.

^{page xx note 2} Wilhelm Busch, England unter den Tudors : Bd. i, Konig Heinrich VII (all published), Stuttgart, 1892 ; translated by A. M. Todd (1895).

^{page xx note 3} ‘A full and sometimes even a literal translation, adopting not only Vergil's views, but also some of his statements which are in contradiction to those made by himself,’ Busch (trans. Todd), p. 399. The first edition of Hall, like the 1534 edition of Vergil, ended at 1509.

^{page xx note 4} Ibid., p. 417.

^{page xx note 5} Busch unfortunately worked from the composite Leyden edition.

^{page xx note 6} Above, pp. xv–xvii.

^{page xxi note 1} Op. cit., p. 397. Cf. Pollard, G., Bull. Inst. Hist. Res., x (1932–3), 12–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

^{page xxi note 2} Flenley, R., Six Town Chronicles of England (1911), p. 47Google Scholar.

^{page xxi note 3} E.g. Empson's speech in self-defence, below, p. 150–1* ; the list of Henry's advisers, below, p. 149*.

^{page xxi note 4} The jousting after Henry VIII's coronation, below, p. 150.17–8 ; cf. Hall (ed. Ellis, 1809), p. 511.

^{page xxi note 5} Below, p. 268.3–10 ; Hall, p. 604.

^{page xxi note 6} Below, p. 324–6; Hall, pp. 728, 753, 760.

^{page xxi note 7} Cf. the war memoirs of Earl Lloyd George and Mr. Winston Churchill. Mr. Churchill's narrative betrays the trained historian marshalling his material, and will have to be used with more subtlety than the helter-skelter ‘documentary’ annals of his older colleague.

^{page xxii note 1} Among whom Vergil had friends : cf. Proc. Soc. Antiquaries of Newcastie-upon-Tyne, 4th Series, viii (1938), p. 111Google Scholar.

^{page xxii note 2} From which Vergil may well have derived his choice of words: cf. below, pp. 276–8.

^{page xxii note 3} Below, p. 208.12.

^{page xxii note 4} Below, pp. 128–30, 133* ; and cf. above p. xxi, n. 3 ; cf. Vincentius, P., ‘Narratio Historica … A.D. 1553’, in Eng. Hist. Rev., Ixiii (1948), p. 353, for NorthumberlandGoogle Scholar.

^{page xxii note 5} Below, pp. 122,134 ; cf. 128*, 149*.

^{page xxii note 6} Cf. Hay, in Eng. Hist. Rev., liv. (1939), pp. 246–9Google Scholar.

^{page xxiii note 1} Ibid., pp. 246–7 ; below, p. 116; Williamson, J. A., The Ocean in English History (1941), p. 19Google Scholar.

^{page xxiii note 2} Ed. by Sir Henry Ellis (1811) ; see his introduction, pp. xix–xx.

^{page xxiii note 3} The extent to which the following lines derive from C. L. Kingsford's works will be apparent; I also had the advantage during 1938 of attending lectures in Oxford by Mr. K. B. MacFarlane on the sources for English fifteenth-century history. H. J. Chaytor, From Script to Print (1945), may be consulted with profit on the evolution of vernacular literature.

^{page xxiv note 1} Kingsford, pp. 135–9.

^{page xxiv note 2} E. Gordon Duff, XVth Century English Books (Bibliographical Society, 1917), nos. 97, 172.

^{page xxiv note 3} Reprinted by Sir Henry Ellis in 1811.

^{page xxv note 1} Kingsford, pp. 80–1 ; Flenley, pp. 27–34. A Bristol city chronicle of the fifteenth century has survived ; in the sixteenth century the practice is found in Kings Lynn, v Chester, Dublin and Leicester. This movement was to grow into civic history proper by the end of the sixteenth century. How important this urban public was may be gauged from the concessions which Vergil made to it, at considerable expense to his style and the form of his work, by introducing London material into the 1546 edition of the Anglica Historia. This information is not found in the MS. or editio princeps and was derived in the main from the 1533 edition of Fabyan. On the town chronicle, see also Starke, F. J., Populare englische Chroniken des 15. Jahrhunderts (Neue Deutsche Forshungen, Berlin, 1935). pp. 36–90.Google Scholar

^{page xxv note 2} Reprinted by Sir Henry Ellis in 1811.

^{page xxv note 3} Except the last part. No doubt the seven ages of the world was a related thought. Arnold (ed. Ellis, pp. 156–7) tabulated them among his miscellaneous extracts.

^{page xxv note 4} Ed. Ellis, p. 54.

^{page xxvi note 1} On the town chronicle in Europe see Flenley, pp. 36–8, and the authorities there quoted.

^{page xxvi note 2} On this cf. Sabbadini, R., Storia del Ciceronianismo (Turin, 1885), esp. p. 81Google Scholar; Allen, P. S., Age of Erasmus (1914), pp. 253Google Scholar sqq. Vergil himself illustrates the point when he claims as the chief reason for his pride in De Inuentoribus Rerum and the Adagia that he ‘was first among the Romans to undertake both these matters’.

^{page xxvi note 3} What follows is mainly derived from E. Fueter, Geschichte der neueren Historiographie, here used in the French translation by Jeanmaire, E., Histoire de la historiographie moderne (Paris, 1914)Google Scholar, and the brilliant chapter in R. Sabbadini, II Metodo degli Umanisti (Florence, n.d. [1922]), pp. 75–85.

^{page xxvi note 4} Sabbadini, Metodo, p. 79.

^{page xxvii note 1} Cf. Pontano's introduction to his Bettum Neapolitanum, where he describes the political situation in Italy and analyses the condition of each of the main states—except his own, Naples, which is only referred to by name ! (Fueter, p. 47).

^{page xxviii note 1} See Fueter, p. 171, for Emilio, whose work, unfinished at his death in 1529, appeared in parts in 1516, 1519 and 1539. It did, of course, happen sometimes that Italian states employed historians who were not natives of the community, with a corresponding increase in objectivity : e.g. at Venice (Fueter, pp. 35 sqq.).

^{page xxviii note 2} This principle was unfortunately abandoned in print. A glance at the collations below will show how right Vergil was to assume that latinisation of proper names would lead to ambiguity. Cf. the spelling of Bourchier—Bowsher in MS., Burscherius in print; or Poynings—Ponyng in MS. (which is recognisable), Ponyngus in print (which is not and misled the English translator into making it Peningham). Valla adopted the unstylish principle (Fueter, p. 45). In general, cf. epilogue, below, p. 336.

^{page xxix note 1} Vergil also defined history in De Inuenioribus Rerum, i, cap. 12.

^{page xxix note 2} Ed. Ellis (Cam. Soc, xxxvi), 26, 107 ; BC, pp. 15, 53.

^{page xxix note 3} Fueter, p. 171.

^{page xxix note 4} Vergil at the outset of the history thus describes the English : ‘I thincke there is noe people at this present which doth more sincerelie and diligentlie observe all thinges that appartaine to the trew service and glorie of Godde … Wherefore the cheefe commendation of Englishemen consisteth in this, that of all other thei are moste Christian and relligious’ (Cam. Soc, xxxvi. 26; BC, p. 15). Cf. Fueter, p. 202. It should be noted that Vergil usually distinguishes popular legends and superstitions as such (cf. below, pp. 8.27, 220.14); his criticism of belief in the ‘supernatural’ in the De Prodigiis was completely orthodox from the point of view of the church.

^{page xxx note 1} Below, pp. 332–4.

^{page xxx note 2} Macchiavelli also uses this method in the later books of his Florentine history in order to glorify the Medici as little as possible (Fueter, p. 82).

^{page xxx note 3} Cam. Soc, xxxvi. 26–33 ; BC, pp. 15–18.

^{page xxx note 4} Cam. Soc, xxxvi. 107.

^{page xxxi note 1} Cf. ibid., pp. 48 (origins of town names), 87 (Roman wall), 113 (Saxons), 212 (Normans).

^{page xxxi note 2} Cf. ibid., pp. 48, 192, 203.

^{page xxxi note 3} Ibid., pp. 217–18 ; BC, p. 374 ; Cam. Soc, xxix. 38.

^{page xxxi note 4} Cam. Soc., xxxvi. 219–20. Cf. H. Rashdall, Medieval Universities (ed. Powicke and Emden, 1936), iii. 414 n., where it is suggested that the limitation to the tenure of fellowships in the foundation of Wadham College was a result of Vergil's criticism.

^{page xxxi note 5} Cf. ibid., pp. 245–6, a very strong passage condemning sloth and gluttony, which, as it appears in the MS. (fo. 126V in vol. i), cannot be considered a concession to later Tudor policy.

^{page xxxi note 6} Cam. Soc, xxix. 72 ; this is not in the MS.

^{page xxxi note 7} BC, p. 391. It is the display of this partisan spirit which provokes Vergil to attack in the MS. the works of Gaguin, ‘non testis sed hostis Anglicarum rerum, ac odii magis quam ueri memor’ ; i, fos. 219, 276, 300V ; ii, fos. 65, 114V, 160, 160v, 208v. Besides despising Gaguin's blindly pro-French approach, Vergil no doubt also disliked his medieval narrative ; Gaguin was not a humanist. Cf. Fueter, p. 172, and Thuasne, L., Epistolae & Orationes Gaguini (Paris, 1903), i. 116–26Google Scholar.

^{page xxxi note 8} Cam. Soc., xxix. 82.

^{page xxxii note 1} Below, pp. 60, 274. It is of some significance that on the few occasions on which the word ‘nostri’ is found in the Anglica Historia it is always used in connection with crusades, where in medieval Latin it had an almost technical connotation, and never with purely English groups ; cf. BC, pp. 175, 250 ; below, p. 300.21.

^{page xxxii note 2} Below, p. 242.12–27, quoting Cicero.

^{page xxxii note 3} Kingsford, pp. 55–64, 69. Four Latin manuscripts of Tito Livio have survived ; as many of the ‘Pseudo-Elmham’ ; and abridgements of both in Latin and English. On the ‘Translator of Livius’ see below, n. 5.

^{page xxxii note 4} It first appears in an ‘incorrect version’ as a continuation of Hardyng's Chronicle in 1543 (Kingsford, p. 185).

^{page xxxii note 5} On Andre, cf. Busch, pp. 393–5 ; the other humanist works are : Dominic Mancini's Be Occupations Regni Anglie (edited and translated by C. A. J. Armstrong, The Usurpation of Richard III, 1936) ; Piero Griffo's De Denariis Sancti Petri (cf. above, p. xi, n. 2) ; and the Life of Henry V by the ‘Translator of Livius’ who wrote in 1513 (cf. Kingsford, First English Life of Henry V, esp. pp. x–xiv).

^{page xxxii note 6} W. J. B. Crotch, Prologues and Epilogues of William Caxton (Early Eng. Text Soc., original series, 176 ; 1928), pp. 64–7.

^{page xxxiii note 1} Crotch, p. 68 (revision of Trevisa's ‘rude and old englysch’). Caxton seems to have been genuinely interested in linguistic problems : cf. ibid., p. 108 (translation of Eneydos, 1490)

^{page xxxiii note 2} Ed. Ellis, pp. 2–4 (‘Prologus’, stanzas 8, 9, 14).

^{page xxxiv note 1} Gerould, G. H., ‘King Arthur and Politics’, Speculum, ii (1927), pp. 33–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar (cf. ibid., pp. 317–21, 448) ; Greenlaw, E., Studies in Spenser's Historical Allegory (Baltimore, 1932), pp. 1–58Google Scholar, 167–99; Brinkley, Roberta F., Arthurian Legend in the XVIIth Century (Baltimore, 1932), pp. vii–viiiGoogle Scholar. On these and other American studies of a related nature see Tillyard, E. M. W., Shakespeare's Historical Plays (1944)Google Scholar. The most recent study is by Bennett, Josephine W., The Evolution of ‘The Faerie Queene’ (Chicago, 1942), pp. 64–79Google Scholar.

^{page xxxiv note 2} Caxton printed King Arthur in 1485 at the request of many gentlemen who succeeded in persuading him there was evidence of the historical Arthur ; but more important perhaps was Arthur's belonging to the company of the nine most worthy men : Hector, Alexander, Julius Caesar, Joshua, David, Maccabeus, Charlemagne and Godfrey of Boulogne (Crotch, op. cit., pp. 92–5).

^{page xxxiv note 3} Greenlaw, pp. 170–2. 4 Ibid., pp. 4–7.

^{page xxxiv note 4} Ibid., pp. 11–15. The Assertio has been reprinted by W. E. Mead, The Famous Historie of Chinon of England (E.E.T.S., orig. ser. 165, 1925), together with a translation by Richard Robinson of 1582.

^{page xxxiv note 5} Leland's other charge against Vergil was more honourable : that Vergil was not first in the field of English history ; though the rival candidate whom he puts forward is scarcely to be taken seriously. The work in question was the Historia Regum Angliae by John Rous. See the edition by T. Hearne (Oxford, 1744), esp. p. xxiv ; Kingsford, pp. 170, 184–5.

^{page xxxv note 1} [Ipswich], 1548, fo. 223 ; cf. Greenlaw, pp. 180–2.

^{page xxxv note 2} Christmas, H., Select Works of John Bale (Parker Society, 1849), p. 8Google Scholar.

^{page xxxv note 3} Ellis (Cam. Soc, xxix), Introd., p. xxiii.

^{page xxxv note 4} Ibid., p. xxv.

^{page xxxv note 5} Ibid., p. xxvi.

^{page xxxv note 6} Macray, W. D., Annals of the Bodleian Library (1868), pp. 10–11Google Scholar; Ellis, op. cit., p. xxvii. There seems no doubt that some of the charges against Flaccius Illyricus were transferred to Vergil, who was not only another foreigner but (unlike Flaccius Illyricus) a papist as well. On the depredations of the German scholar see J. H. Baxter, Copiale Prioratus Sanctiandree (St. Andrews, 1930), Introd., p. xviii.

^{page xxxv note 7} C. Hopper in Notes and Queries, 2nd Ser., iv (1857), p. 67.

^{page xxxv note 8} Ellis, op. cit., pp. xx–xxii.

^{page xxxvi note 1} Markham, Clements R., ‘Richard III : a doubtful verdict reviewed’, Eng. Hist. Rev., vi (1891), p. 257CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

^{page xxxvi note 2} Select Works of John Bale, p. 8.

^{page xxxvi note 3} The dedication is quoted from the edition by Sir Henry Ellis, pp. v–vii. Hall obtained the origin of letters by Moses from Vergil–s De Inuentoribus Rerum, i, cap. 6.

^{page xxxvi note 4} Hall, of course, by the plan of his work avoids having to make more than a passing reference as here to the Brute and Arthur legends ; cf. ed. Ellis, p. 428. It is noteworthy that Hall nowhere attacks Vergil.

^{page xxxvii note 1} If this notion of tabulating authorities (Hall names 36 different sources) had occurred to Vergil he would probably have rejected it on aesthetic grounds. It may here be noted that in all printed editions of the Anglica Historia the index ends with a list of kings and bishops in order of succession with page references, which was a novel and must have proved a useful device ; prouerbia are also collected in the index.

^{page xxxvii note 2} Above, pp. xxviii–xxix.

^{page xxxvii note 3} On the dramatic quality of More's Richard III see the remarks of A. F. Pollard in the article cited above, p. xvii, n. 1.

^{page xxxvii note 4} Campbell, Lily B., Mirror for Magistrates (Cambridge, 1938), p. 192Google Scholar.

^{page xxxviii note 1} Campbell, Lily B., Mirror for Magistrates (Cambridge, 1938), p. 182Google Scholar.

^{page xxxiii note 2} Ibid., p. 155 (James I of Scotland, cf. pp. 212–18, Henry VI) ; and p. 143 (Thomas earl of Salisbury).

^{page xxxiii note 3} Quoted by Wright, Louis B., Middle-class Culture in Elizabethan England (Chapel Hill, 1935), p. 304Google Scholar.

^{page xxxiii note 4} ‘An apologie for poetrie’, in E. Rhys, Prelude to Poetry (Everyman's Library), pp. 36–7.

^{page xxxiii note 5} Ibid., p. 22 ; cf. p. 14, ‘the Historian [sayth] what men have done’.

^{page xxxiii note 6} Ibid., p. 25.

^{page xxxiii note 7} Ibid., pp. 25, 27.

^{page xxxiii note 8} Ibid., p. 26.

^{page xxxiii note 9} On the whole question of Tudor historiography see Campbell, Lily B., Tudor Conceptions of History in a ‘Mirror for Magistrates’ (Berkeley, California, 1936)Google Scholar; and her recently published Shakespeare's ‘Histories’ (Huntingdon Library, San Marino, California, 1947), pp. 8–116Google Scholar. Cf. also Tillyard, E. M. W., Shakespeare's Historical Plays, 1944, pp. 54–64Google Scholar; and Butterfield, H., The Englishman and his History (Cambridge, 1944), pp. 12–30Google Scholar, where the treatment by Tudor historians of King John and Magna Carta is used as an index of the political philosophy involved in Tudor historiography.

^{page xxxix note 1} Kingsford, p. 255 ; quotations from Cam. Soc. xxix. 52, 70, 71, 74, 87, 96.

^{page xxxix note 2} ‘Apologie’, p. 20.

^{page xxxix note 3} Mirror for Magistrates, p. 198 ; cf. 246–7.

^{page xl note 1} For a description of the manuscript, see C. Stornajolo, Codices Urbinates Latini (Rome, 1902–21), i. 500–1. There is a partial transcript of the manuscript in the Public Record Office, Roman transcripts i, no. 7. This transcript begins at fo. 190 of vol. ii and goes to the end. Cf. Gasquet, F., ‘Materials for a new edition of Vergil's Anglica Historia’, Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc, N.S., xvi (1902), pp. 1–17Google Scholar.

^{page xl note 2} See above, pp. xiii–xv.

^{page xl note 3} Vol. i, fos. 16, 41, 48, 58, 107, 123, 143, 200, 254 ; vol. ii, fos. 67a, 72, 77, 84, 89, 95, 101, 102, 105, 225, 233, 236, 240, 268, 283a. Cf. below, pp. 4, 16, 124, 176.

^{page xl note 4} Vol. i, fos. 29V, 92a (r. & v.), 156r, 221v, 271V ; vol. ii, fos. 2V, 91V, 203a (r. & v.), 209V, 211v, 212r, 241a (r. & v.), 270V, 297 (r. & v.). Cf.. below, pp. 24. 130.220.